Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 30 Aug 2006 10:54:34 -0700 | From | Paul Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] Rename lock_cpu_hotplug/unlock_cpu_hotplug |
| |
Paul E. McKenney wrote: > Well, my next question was going to be whether cpuset readers really > need to exclude the writers, or whether there can be a transition > period while the mastodon makes the change as long as it avoids stomping > the locusts. ;-)
The mastodon's (aka mammoths ;) may make a batch of several related changes to the cpuset configuration. What's important is that the locusts see either none or all of the changes in a given batch, not some intermediate inconsistent state, and that the locusts see the change batches in the same order they were applied.
Off the top of my head, I doubt I care when the locusts see the changes. Some delay is ok, if that's your question.
But don't try too hard to fit any work you do to cpusets. For now, I don't plan to mess with cpuset locking anytime soon. And when I do next, it might be that all I need to do is to change the quick lock held by the locusts from a mutex to an ordinary rwsem, so that multiple readers (locusts) can access the cpuset configuration in parallel.
-- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |